emu onlinegooglehalle librarywriting center

505.3 Poster (25%, 25 points)

Develop a poster that either 1) provides an alternative presentation of your work with Project Two, or 2) addresses another issue or controversy related to our study this semester. You will design the poster in class and print it at Halle Library. The poster should imaginatively introduce some perspective or line of inquiry. It will likely include both textual and visual elements, and you should develop these mindful of the ways they function together. You will have two full weeks to complete the poster with substantial in-class time to work on it before sharing it with your classmates on Monday, December 12, the day it is due.

Posters may be one of three sizes: 11x17, 18x24, or 27x39. Plan to print it at Halle Library. The printing center is located in the library's lower level across from the computer lab. Plan to print it no later than Friday, December 9, as printing larger sizes may take up to a few hours. Printing the smallest size (11x17) at Halle will cost $.20 per color copy and can be done while you wait. Printing larger posters at Halle Library costs .50 per inch, so plan to spend as much as $9-14 to print your poster if you decide to produce a larger poster (this expense is offset somewhat by the low cost of books for this course).

For additional guidance on poster-making, you can see an example of an academic poster related to P3 here. For step-by-step guides and additional considerations, you can of course turn to the web (e.g., here, here, and here to start), or you could view Jerry Overmyer's step-by-step YouTube video, "Making an academic research poster using PowerPoint."

Evaluation Criteria

P3 is valued at 25 points (25% of your overall grade in the course).

The poster will be evaluated according to the following three criteria:

  1. Communicates rhetoric of science and technology insights: (provides context, focus, and scope appropriate to the issue and the size of the poster)
  2. Technical precision: (image use and quality; readability)
  3. Aesthetic appeal: (record of audience perceptions, deliberate design elements)

Each criterion listed above will be evaluated on the following scale:


EX: Exceptional. The writer has applied the criterion with distinction.
AC: Acceptable/meets expectations. The writer has applied the criterion to a satisfactory degree.
NI: Needs improvement. The writer has minimally applied the criterion in the project.
NA: Not applied. The writer has not applied the criterion in the project.

Contact Information

Derek N. Mueller, PhD
Associate Professor of Rhetoric and Writing
Director of Composition
Department of English
Virginia Tech
Office: 315 Shanks Hall
Spring 2019 Office Hours: T, 12-3
Phone: +1-734-985-0485

"Rhetoric of science is simply, then, the study of how scientists persuade and dissuade each other and the rest of us about nature, —the study of how scientists argue in the making of knowledge" (xii). Randy Harris, "Introduction," Landmark Essays on Rhetoric of Science: Case Studies

"The reality, feasibility, and representativeness of a project are progressive concepts, but they are also controversial; that's why it's so hard to get a clear idea about the technologies involved" (66). Bruno Latour, Aramis, or The Love of Technology

Creative Commons License
Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.